Search This Blog

Showing posts with label communism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label communism. Show all posts

Sunday, 3 May 2020

World History: The Russian Revolution and early Soviet Union


Eric Hobsbawm characterised two events as beginning what he described as the 'Short Twentieth Century', or 'The Age of Extremes'. These were the First World War and the Russian Revolution. Last time on World History we discussed the First World War, and today we will be looking at the Russian Revolution. Perhaps one of the most important events in history, the Russian Revolution was an attempt to create a clean break from the old world and create a new one - very few events can claim the same, such as the Agricultural, Haitian, and French Revolutions. This controversial event still divides historians, so I have tried to draw from sources across the political spectrum - bare in mind I am a libertarian Marxist/anarcho-syndicalist so this will inevitably impact my analysis. Due to the scope of work which has been done, I want to remind readers that World History is not meant to be an in depth look - just an overview which zones in on some aspects of the past. We will not just be looking at the Revolution, we will be looking at the Stalin years as well.

Prelude to Revolution
Nicholas II and his family
When we last looked specifically at Russia it was during the empire's turbulent nineteenth century, a period of time which saw conservative reform to conservative backlash. Alexander II had tried to reform Russia following the disastrous Crimean War - serfdom was abolished, the press was given greater freedoms, and small-scale education was implemented across Russia. However, reforms were undertaken to keep the social structure intact, and to create a 'modern' nation Alexander began a series of attempts to 'Russify' the incredibly diverse empire. For example, since 1863 Polish was barred in education in favour of Russian. Following the assassination of Alexander II by the socialist group People's Will, these reforms ended - Alexander III and Nicholas II brought back unrestricted conservatism. Russia, though, was beginning to undergo great changes. Russia remained rural and disconnected for most of its history, but industrialisation was very slowly creating an urban workforce. The influx of liberal and socialist writings during the nineteenth century, many written by Russian exiles, created new opportunities to criticise the autocratic rule of the tsar. Domestically, various socialist groups began forming, although many resembled secret societies more than mass movements in keeping with a larger history of Russian resistance. The overbearing nature of tsarist rule meant that even anarchist societies had to remain small and insular to avoid the state instantly cracking down on them. Various Left-wing groups emerged in the Russian Empire ascribing to various ideologies, and national identities - among them included socialist and nationalist parties fighting for Polish or Lithuanian independence, the Jewish Labor Bund, the Socialist Revolutionary Party, and, most famously, the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP). The RSDLP would see many of the major figures of the Russian Revolution be members of it - Lenin, Zinoviev, Trotsky, Kollontai etc. In 1903 the party split over the issue of party membership between the Mensheviks, under Julius Martov, and the Bolsheviks, under Vladimir Lenin.
Rasputin
Opposition did not only take the form of socialists. Liberals, such as the Kadet Party, wished to have a form of parliament in a constitutional monarchy, as in Britain, or the more radical ones wanting a republic. There was even a small feminist movement, but it was extremely small, especially compared to movements in Japan, Germany, and other states. Members of the aristocracy could oppose the government for several reasons. The main ones were the Tsarina Alexandra and the famous priest Grigori Rasputin. A mixture of sexism and xenophobia meant that Alexandra received most of the abuse Nicholas II should have received - it was a taboo to blame the tsar himself. As the Tsarina had the opportunity to exercise some authority sexism meant that she was portrayed as the 'scheming woman', and as she was German she was accused of undermining Russia to support Germany. Although, she could exercise authoritarian ideas publicly - according to Leon Trotsky in his account of the revolution she apparently called for moderate socialist Alexander Kerensky to be hung. Rasputin was not well liked. A mystic he was brought into the tsarist court as it was believed that he could heal the heir Alexei of his haemophilia. He become popular with Tsar and Tsarina, and began influencing policy. Rasputin was accused of seducing Alexandra who would then get Nicholas to pass certain policies or fire certain officials at the mystic's whim. 

War, Revolution, and War

Russia kept on pushing eastwards building the Trans-Siberian Railway which was meant to be the crowning achievement of the empire. However, at the Siberian end of the railway Russian interests clashed with Japanese who were both trying to exert influence over Korea and Manchuria. This exploded into the 1904 Russo-Japanese War which proved to be a disaster for Russia. Nicholas personally took control so the ensuing mistakes he couldn't avoid. Russian soldiers were poorly supplied compared to the Japanese, and the navy was wiped out at the Battle of Tsushima. Russia lost the war, and revolution broke out. In January 1905 over 100,000 people, led by priest Georgy Gapon, and marched to the tsar's Winter Palace. While Gapon was opposed to some of the more radical demands, these demands were made. Workers' councils, called soviets, started emerging, and a young revolutionary Leon Trotsky encouraged workers to strike. 'Bloody Sunday' soon ensued - Cossacks charged into the crowd killing 1,500 men, women, and children. Across the empire sparks of protest emerged. Between January and May, 500 strikes broke out in Lodz, 90 in Warsaw, and the now famous sailors of Battleship Potemkin mutinied in May. Not all the uprisings, however, were done in solidarity against government repression. Antisemitic attacks swept across many areas of the empire - 41 Jews were murdered in Kishinev, Moldova in a period of 36 hours of massacres, in Zhitomir, Ukraine 400 were killed, and in Tomsk, Siberia saw antisemites lock Jews in buildings before setting them on fire.

Following the revolution, massacres, and strikes Nicholas formed the first parliament: the Duma of 1906. The Duma had a mixed existence. While being elected, allowing for debate about laws (which could only be passed by the Duma), and offering a way to challenge tsarist autocracy; at the same time it was incredibly weak. Nicholas made it clear that what he said goes, and repeatedly dissolved the Duma when it went against his wishes. Until his assassination in 1911, the Duma was dominated by Nicholas's personal ally Pyotr Stolypin - a conservative and monarchist who was keen to limit the spread of liberal democracy. Sheila Fitzpatrick had also emphasised how Stolypin further tried to curtail grassroots revolts through agricultural reform. 1905 was the largest peasant uprising in Russia since the 1700s, so Stolypin began a series of reforms to break this. Most peasants lived in a united community, called a mir, so Stolypin encouraged peasants to break off of the mir to become individual landowners, the eventual kulaks. Fitzpatrick has even stated that Lenin himself feared this reform, because if it had been as successful as Stolypin hoped it would have lost the urban proletariat a much needed ally. Stolypin was assassinated by a socialist while watching a play in Ukraine, although a conspiracy theory, echoed by novelist Alexander Solzhenitsyn, that the assassin was set-up by hard-right allies to the tsar who feared the minister's power. Meanwhile, the Duma sporadically continued. The Mensheviks used it, when they weren't in exile, to attack the tsar and aristocracy, but, as emphasised by Fitzpatrick, the workers were restless who started moving away from them. The Bolsheviks started taking advantage of this - using Lenin's idea of the vanguard party to join the workers in revolution in his 1902 work What is to be Done? - although this was difficult. Like the Mensheviks, many Bolsheviks were exiled. Then, in 1914, war broke out.
Russian troops in WWI
Russia entered the First World War immediately in August 1914 on the side of the Entente. Like elsewhere across the world, entry into the war created a wave of nationalism in the Russian Empire, although this was mainly in the Russian regions. As St Petersburg sounded too German it was renamed Petrograd, as an example. It is no coincidence, that when things went bad during the war, that the tsarina was blamed. Nicholas took personal control of the Russian military and it is partially his ineptitude which resulted in the disastrous war for Russia. Although Russia had some victories, such as wiping out an Ottoman army in the Caucasus, it was a disaster - by mid-1915 Russia had lost its Polish lands. Poor infrastructure hit the mobility of the army - when the February Revolution broke out it took until May for Siberians to hear about it. As always, big personalities got in the way. Nicholas's ego was immense, but his skill was lacking, so there was not a coherent war policy. General Brusilov's offensive in 1916 against Austria could have been a greater push, possibly even knocking out the rival empire by taking Vienna, but other generals refused to change strategies to help. Domestically, the tsarina and Rasputin exercised great influence with the tsar focusing on the war. This dislike of the duo was so intense that a cabal of aristocrats assassinated Rasputin in 1916. Military disasters, and losing important areas to Germany, caused mass desertion. Although soldiers regularly received food this was at the expense of civilians who experienced food shortages, especially after the fall of Poland. Advancing and retreating armies looted villages and towns - resulting in pogroms in Jewish regions. The revolution was about to begin.

The February Revolution

To avoid confusion it is important to note that, unlike the rest of Europe, Russia in 1917 still used the Julian calendar. It would only use the Gregorian calendar when the Bolsheviks took power. As a result, pre-Bolshevik dates are a month behind other dates consequently. On March 8 (February 23 in Russia) Petrograd Social Democrats on International Women's Day issued leaflets. Food production problems, rising inflation rates, and war setbacks had caused mass dissatisfaction with the regime, and the Social Democrats handed leaflets to women waiting in food lines. Their leaflets read:
The government is guilty; it started the war and cannot end it. It is destroying the country and your starving is their fault. The capitalists are guilty; for their profit the war goes on. It's about time to tell them loud: Enough! Down with the criminal government and all its gang of thieves and murderers. Long live peace!
Women started bread protests which inspired factory workers in the Vyborg District and the Putilov Factory. Activists joined the protests and protesters crossed the frozen Neva River where they clashed with the police beginning the revolution. Two days later Tsar Nicholas II ordered the garrison to put down the revolt but many units joined the crowd with a few killing their officers. Ships anchored in Helsinki and Kronstadt had sailors throwing their officers overboard, or into furnaces. The Duma urged Nicholas to implement immediate political measures but in response he dismissed the Duma. On March 12 the tsar's crack units, the Volynian Regiment, mutinied and joined the revolt. The same day two shadow governments were formed: the Provisional Government made of senior Duma members at the Tauride Palace, and the Petrograd soviet in another wing of the palace. The Provisional Government soon arrested some of the tsar's ministers although this was done to protect them from revolutionaries. With the monarchy losing all control on March 15 Nicholas II made this statement:
In agreement with the State Duna, we have thought it best to abdicate the throne of the Russian state and to lay down the supreme power. Not wishing to part with our beloved son, we hand down our inheritance to our brother, Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich.
The tsar's brother was chosen as Alexei was seen as being too sick, still suffering from haemophilia, and still underage. Michael, however, reigned for just a day ending Russian monarchy which had ruled for a thousand years, four hundred years of Tsardom, and three hundred years of Romanov rule.

The Revolutionaries
Stalin, Lenin, and Trotsky
Before we get to October I want to quickly go over some of the leading revolutionaries of this period. Most famously, we have Vladimir Lenin. Born Vladimir Ulyanov he came from a family of socialist revolutionaries with his older brother being executed for his involvement in a plot to assassinate the tsar. Like many Russian socialists Lenin fled abroad, adopted a new name, and became involved in the various international leftist discussions. Lenin is primarily known for two contributions to Marxist theory: first, that imperialism was the final stage of capitalism so the end of capitalism requires national self-determination of oppressed peoples, and second, very much in line with Russian revolutionaries, that a vanguard party was required to guide the proletariat. Polish-Jewish Marxist Rosa Luxemburg vehemently disagreed with the idea of the vanguard party seeing it as a clique. Lenin became head of the Bolsheviks as his faction believed that the party should have restricted membership in contrast to the Mensheviks who disagreed. Speaking of Mensheviks, one of the key Mensheviks (who went over to the Bolsheviks after February) was Leon Trotsky. Born to a Ukrainian-Jewish family under the name Lev Bronstein he had a long history of political activism, being exiled to Siberia in 1899 due to it, and was influential in forming soviets during the 1905 Revolution. There was also Grigory Zinoviev, a Russian-Jewish Marxist who became Lenin's close ally; and also his future enemy Joseph Stalin. Born to a Georgian family, and originally destined to be a priest, he would become an editor for the Bolshevik paper Pravda. Finally, another revolutionary I want to mention is Alexandra Kollontai. Born to a Ukrainian-Cossack family, through her father, and a Finnish peasant family, through her mother. Kollontai would evolve from liberal to Marxist during a tour of Western Europe funded by her parents. Through political activism she would also be sent across Europe, where she played a crucial role in encouraging the feminist movement in Scandinavia. 
Alexandra Kollontai

February to October
The February Revolution was seen by many Marxists as the bourgeois revolution against the monarchy, a socialist one could therefore be possible. Many started returning from exile - Kollontai was greeted by cheering soldiers when she entered Finland, and Trotsky instantly returned all the way from New York. Due to poor infrastructure exiles in Siberia heard that 'something' had happened in Petrograd months later, so they left to see what happened. At first the new Provisional Government of Russia's first republic was hopeful - a variety of parties sat in the new parliament led by socialist Alexander Kerensky. Observers outside Russia saw it as the state embracing liberal democracy. However, from both a bottom-up and top-down approach to history we can see how weak and unpopular the government was. Kerensky based his legitimacy on a coalition consisting of socialists, liberals, conservatives, and monarchists leading to an unstable system. The people of Russia had formed soviets across urban areas - most famously there was the Petrograd Soviet forming 'dual power'. This is a key communist idea, Lenin particularly advocated this before 1917, states that grassroots workers' governments would exist alongside liberal democracies to offer alternate organisations to the state. Soviets quickly grew due to government unpopularity and scarcities caused by the war. Women were especially mad - they were the ones to have started the revolution but remained out of politics. The small feminist movement was keen to remind men about the betrayal. The Provisional Government controversially chose to continue the war exacerbating the inequalities in a state which had already been exacerbated by the war.
The July Days
During the February Revolution the Soviets had become powerful but the Government became distant from the Soviets; in early June soviets around the country sent representatives to Petrograd to the First All-Russia Congress of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies. At the start of April Lenin presented his April Theses criticizing the apparent failures of the February Revolution and that power should lie with the soviets who should bring about socialism. Germany, wishing to disrupt Russia, smuggled Lenin into Russia via train from Switzerland most famously arriving in Finland. In April workers and soldiers protested in Petrograd due to the continuation of the war, and following another protest in July the state chose to brutally crush it and blame the Bolsheviks. Many Bolsheviks were arrested and Lenin had to go into hiding. The people were dissatisfied and started turning to the Bolsheviks seeing the moderate socialists as betraying them. A former soldier in Moscow said:
You [The Provisional Government] have the audacity to say that freedom has come. But isn't your current power over the people that the bourgeoisie delivered to you, based on coercion?...The bourgeoisie is striving for democratic forms of governance because in them it sees the most convenient method of oppression and exploitation.
Following the July Days Kerensky took over the government but anger at the government remained. Thanks to weakness he was willing to violence against deserters and protesters, such as sending troops to suppress the 'Tsaritsyn Republic' declared by radicalized soldiers and Bolsheviks. Then the Kornilov Affair happened. Commander-in-Chief General Lavr Kornilov wished to end left-wing protests, and some of his followers wanted him to seize power. However, he just wanted to hang soviet members and see order return to Petrograd. When Kerensky asked Kornilov to come to Petrograd to help restore order in September the general opted to purge the government, so Kerensky released Bolsheviks, including Trotsky's Red Guard, to stop him. Soldiers deserted Kornilov when the Red Guard infiltrated his army, and workers and railway workers went on strike disrupting his supply lines. In the end Kornilov's coup failed and there was a drastic swing to the left in the soviets and army. Thus the stage was set for October.

October

Following the July Days Lenin had been hiding in Finland where he had been advocating armed revolution. In October he returned, in secret, to Petrograd to plan a revolution. On October 23 the Bolshevik Central Committee voted 10-2 to oust Kerensky's government, and they formed a committee under Trotsky to organize the revolution itself. They were so confident that they didn't even bother concealing their plans so Kerensky actually knew some details of it! However, Kerensky's weak position and, the radicalization of the urban masses and army meant there was little he could do other than seize the Bolshevik press, which he soon lost control of. On October 25 armed forces occupied railway stations and military strongholds while at Kronstadt sailors announced their allegiance to the Bolsheviks. The next day the Provisional Government's headquarters, the Winter Palace, was seized and ten years later was mythologized in, what has been regarded as a cinematic epic, Sergei Einstein's October. American journalist John Reed, who also witnessed the Mexican Revolution, reported asking soldiers if they were with the government; the soldier just replied smiling and said 'The government is no more'. Despite popular depictions the seizing of the Winter Palace was not actually violent; often the October Revolution has been described as a bloodless revolution.  What came after was, instead, bloody. Thus history was made.

However, there is a deep historiographical debate about the October Revolution. Richard Pipes famously argued that it was a coup due to Lenin's emphasis on the vanguard party; through this it was a small clique who seized power instead of being a widespread revolt. Even democratic socialist George Lichtheim argued this, although he is far more sympathetic to Lenin than Pipes is. Really from the 1980s in the West, a 'revisionist school' emerged which aimed to look at Soviet history from the bottom-up. Sheila Fitzpatrick is a key figure in this arguing that by looking at social history we can see a mass movement emerged under the Bolsheviks. Workers and peasants took heart in Lenin's calls for 'Peace, Bread, Land' and aided the October Revolution. Fitzpatrick has particularly emphasised that there was such an influx of workers into the party that it was impossible to keep a disciplined vanguard party. Sarah Badcock has argue that, to an extent, Lenin and the Bolsheviks took a lot of their rhetoric from the peasantry themselves, they were in fact keeping up with what the people wanted.

World Revolution
As emphasised by Eric Hobsbawm, the Russian revolutionaries did not see itself as a national revolution but an international one. A key tenant of Marxist theory was the international liberation of the working-class, so exporting revolution was seen as a key tenant. The horrors of the Civil War meant that Bolshevik-style socialism only spread to Mongolia and Tannu Tuva, and even then only because of the Civil War, but there was a clear inspiration across the world. From 1917 to around 1923 a wave of revolutionary and Left-wing activity broke out across the world - Cuban tobacco workers formed soviets, Spanish anarchists rose up, revolutionary student movements broke out in Beijing, China and Cordoba, Argentina, and revolutionary Mexico placed Lenin alongside their murals of Zapata and Monteczuma. Ireland, the UK, France, Netherlands, Italy, China, Argentina, Mexico, India, Iran, Egypt, Australia, Hungary, and Germany were just some areas in the world to see revolutionary movement in some form. Most famously, and tragically, Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht led the Spartacist Uprising in Berlin in January 1919. Brutally crushed it was one of several workers' uprisings in Germany. In the former Russian Empire various states separated themselves, (such as Finland, Ukraine, and Poland), and saw their own socialist risings - a civil war broke out in Finland, and anarchists under Nestor Makhno formed the Ukrainian Free Territory. In February 1919 the newly formed Polish Republic and the Bolsheviks went to war - the Bolsheviks hoped victory would pave a way to successful revolutions across Europe, while Poland wanted more land. However, the consequences of the Civil War, and the breaking of revolts worldwide, meant that 'Socialism in One Country' began to become Soviet policy. Although the Third International was formed, and a specific section was devoted to colonised peoples, 'the Toilers of the East', to continue revolution. After Lenin's death and Stalin's takeover internationalism became geared towards the propping up of the Soviet government.

Civil War and Terror
American troops in Vladivostok
The conservative and liberal forces were not happy about the Bolshevik seizure of power. The 'White Armies' were founded, and funded by various capitalist states like the UK and France, with the intention of ousting the Bolsheviks. In order to defend the revolution Trotsky reorganised the Red Guards into a Red Army with local party commissars becoming key figures in the new force. There was no guarantee of success. Support for the Reds were largely in the cities and conscription in the rural communities won them no friends - often the Red Army resorted to executions to enforce conscription. Eager to leave the war the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk with Germany stripped most of the former empire of its land leaving many citizens angered. Making matters worse key cities such as Warsaw, Vilnius, and Riga, and rich farmland in Poland and Ukraine, were lost depriving the Soviets of much needed industry and farmland. Often forgotten in the Civil War were the left-wing and peasant armies which were formed to resist both Bolshevik and White forces. It is easy to see why the Civil War was so destructive - Jeremy Smith has described how nine armies were on Ukrainian land at one time. Lenin formed the Cheka as a way to route out potential enemies - this resulted in the mass killing of Cossacks and prostitutes. Meanwhile, the White Armies massacred ethnic minorities, especially Jews who were seen as double-agents and Bolshevik allies. Many depictions of Trotsky in White propaganda emphasised his Jewish heritage to incite antisemitism. It has been estimated that somewhere between 7 and 12 million people lost their lives during the war; through a mixture of direct killing, disease, and starvation entire communities vanished. Alliances were formed and vanished. Lenin and Makhno eagerly worked together to knock out the Whites from Ukraine, but afterwards Trotsky used the Red Army to wipe out the Free Territory.
Nestor Makhno
Fighting dragged on until 1923 with the putting down of the Yakut Rebellion, and the Soviet Union came out of the ashes of war. A key reason why was the disunion of the Whites against the unity of the Reds. The generals Kolchak, Denikin, and Yudenich were key figures in the Whites, but were bitterly divided between them about who should have power. Other aspects of the Whites were united only behind their dislike of the Bolsheviks - some wanted a Romanov restoration, others wanted a constitutional monarchy, others a liberal republic. Late 1918 a Bolshevik officer took it upon himself to execute the royal family which deprived many Whites of the reason about why they were fighting. Lenin quickly moved to liquidate both the soviets, and the Mensheviks and Socialist Revolutionaries, so the Reds had a united movement. This united movement also allowed Lenin to create War Communism. This policy would eventually merge into 'state capitalism' or 'bureaucratic socialism' which would characterise later Soviet economics - the state would nationalise and seize all industries to convert it for the war effort. 

Lenin's Rule

Following the destructive Civil War the newly formed Soviet Union was experimental. The Soviet government was keen to distance itself from the old Russian Empire, so there were attempts to not create another Russian state. Part of this was the name - the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). The new state was imagined as a series of Soviet Republics which were envisaged to be equal; within these Soviet Republics would be smaller republics and oblasts devoted to ethnic minorities, like Tatars and Chechens in Russia. Yiddish saw a revival and Jews managed to enter higher education in large numbers for the first time. Lenin swept away the old tsarist laws, and although he brought several authoritarian laws back including restrictions on the press and the death penalty, many laws were left discarded. Due to this, laws prohibiting homosexuality and abortion were reversed, although some Soviet Republics like Azerbaijan brought anti-homosexual laws back. Women's emancipation was mixed. Women were a clear minority in government positions, abortion could only be done by doctors leaving rural women unable to have them, and the Civil War reinforced concepts of masculinity. However, women managed to carve a place for themselves in society. Women used new laws to grant them equality in the workplace, for example, and used welfare to leave the household. Several women further managed to hold significant places within the Soviet government. Alexandra Kollontai made history by becoming the first woman to hold an official role in a cabinet becoming Commissar of Welfare. Kollontai started implementing an impressive welfare system which managed to survive most of the USSR's history, and wanted to challenge the family structure to create a libertarian child-raising system. Instead of the family unit raising the child, instead a community would raise the child together. Nadezhda Krupskaya, Lenin's wife, was incredibly important in the government, and was later Minister of Education. Finally, for a brief period of time we saw an explosion of new, creative culture. The burgeoning film industry was revolutionised by Sergei Einstein who produced historical movies including October, Battleship Potemkin, and Ivan the Terrible which aimed to tell a story where the masses were the protagonist. Einstein is now regarded as being one of film's greatest directors.
Krupskaya
One important policy was the New Economic Policy (NEP). With the Civil War destroying the economy, cultivated land dropped by 62% during the war, Lenin needed a quick way to get it running again. Relying on several figures, like Nikolai Bukharin, the NEP was designed, in Lenin's own words, to be 'a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control'. He even allowed entrepreneurs into the newly formed Communist Party to lead the new economic system. If the soviets had been allowed to reform the NEP may not have needed to become so important to the USSR - the Catalonian anarchists during the Spanish Civil War showed the benefits of direct worker control - but Lenin intended it to only be a temporary policy. Maybe if Lenin had even lived longer it could have been temporary. From 1921 Lenin's health rapidly deteriorated, and in 1922 he experienced his first of many strokes. In January 1924 one last stroke killed Lenin, and with it the fate of the Soviet Union shifted.

The Rise of Stalin

One of the famous last things which Lenin wrote was a letter denouncing basically all his potential heirs: Trotsky, Zinoviev, Kamenev, Stalin, Bukharin, and Pyatakov. He also warned of a potential split in the party between Trotsky and Stalin, and that Stalin must be expelled from any authority. Stalin's aggressive attitude to other party members, especially Krupskaya, and violence in Georgia had turned Lenin firmly against Stalin. At the same time, several rank-and-file members, and some higher up members, criticised the bureaucracy in the party - especially Lenin centralising power in himself following the Civil War. The Politburo, a committee, was originally designed to managed the USSR; although not resembling worker rule it was seen as being better than one authoritarian ruler. A split emerged regardless - the 'Right' under Stalin, Zinoviev, and Kamenev, and the 'Left' under Trotsky. Trotsky was soon outmaneuvered due to his insistence solely on writing, and his recent entry to the Bolsheviks followed by a quick rise which made others view him as an opportunist. Meanwhile, the others could claim a long membership in the party, and for making sacrifices in the lead-up to October. By 1925 the Right had managed to demote Trotsky, but the cunning Stalin planned to centralise power into his hands. C.L.R. James in his often forgotten World Revolution has discussed how Stalin, at times clumsily, forced himself into a theoretician role to gain credibility in the party. While in 1925 Krupskaya managed to side with the Right to demote Trotsky, afterwards she threw her weight behind Zinoviev and Kamenev. Both of them had the support of the Petrograd and Moscow masses behind them. Stalin used cries of factionalism, and using antisemitism to create distrust towards Zinoviev and Trotsky, to pave his way towards becoming party leader in 1927. Stalinism had begun.

Stalinist Rule

Stalinism has often been characterised as being totalitarian - Sheila Fitzpatrick has contested this by stating that the state did not control every aspect of life in the USSR. The occasional purges, although caused by Stalin's own paranoia, indicated that there were some aspects of opposition despite the intense totalitarianism of the state. It is Stalin who reversed many of the progressive policies of the early-1920s - women's movement was restricted, abortion was made illegal, and homosexuality was criminalised across the USSR. Despite being Georgian, he brought back Russification policies; something which we'll discuss soon. A key part of Stalinist rule was the continuation of managed capitalism through rapid industrialisation, and the building of a cult of personality. Even before his formal seizure of power in 1927, he began instituting a cult of personality having cities named after him. The new anthem replaced L'Internationale with the famous Soviet anthem which praised himself; his image was placed in public places; and party propaganda portrayed him as creating the new 'Soviet Man'. However, he could not create this out of nowhere, so he created a cult around Lenin. Using the popular legacy of Lenin he could solidify his own image. Petrograd was renamed Leningrad; the ideology Marxism-Bolshevism was shaped to become Marxism-Leninism; and Lenin's writings were geared towards supporting his policies. While Lenin viewed the NEP and 'Socialism in One Country' as temporary policies, Stalin used them to create continuity with his own rule. Even the idea that Lenin intended one permanent leader came from Stalin's rewriting of history. The rapid industrialisation in the Five Year Plans did quickly industrialise the USSR, but it regularly fell short of expected designs. Naturally, this fact was hidden until the collapse of the USSR in 1991. 

Despite the absolute power which Stalin held, he had to ensure that he was supported by not only the party, but also the masses. The Five Year Plans intended to create a proletariat as a bulwark against a possibly reactionary peasantry, and welfare policies were ascribed to Stalin himself. The cult of personality was a way to ensure he had public support. Of course, if need be people were disappeared. From 1934 the NKVD was formed to 'liquidate' potential enemies through execution or imprisonment in the brutal gulags - if the guards didn't kill you the climate potentially could do so. Enemies were deposed of in various ways - often exile and then execution. Trotsky was expelled from the USSR and Zinoviev was exiled to Kazakhstan before their eventual deaths - Zinoviev after a 1936 show trial and Trotsky via an icepick in Mexico in 1940. Show trials were another way to build support - openly show enemies and scare others into silence. Especially between 1936 and 1938 these executions became known as the Great Purges - over 680,000 were killed. Like-minded individuals were promoted, Trosim Lysenko being one, the figure behind disastrous agricultural policies. Lysenko was a Stalin loyalist so was promoted despite his theories being seen as pseudo-scientific. The USSR had some of the best geneticists in the world, but Lysenko's opposition to genetics (calling DNA fictitious) meant that some were even purged for being 'traitors'. Arguing in favour of hybridisation and planting seeds extremely close together it caused mass crop failures.

Famine and Ethnic Cleansing

One of the darkest aspects of Stalin's rule was the Great Famine or Holodomor. This was a devastating famine which broke out in 1932 and 1933 in Ukraine and western Russia causing the deaths of around 3.5 million people. There have been intense debates about what caused the famine - ranging from weather to purposeful human actions. Part of it was associated with the new land reforms. Soviet officials had long pondered about land collectivisation - many desired it, although Trotsky did argue that it was 'useless', but many feared that forcing it would be a disaster. Stalin, however, pressed on the collectivising the farms of the kulaks. Those who resisted could face deportation with Neil Faulkner estimating that the gulag population rose from 30,000 in 1928 to 2 million by 1930 to 5 million by 1935. The forced collectivisation mixed with Lysenko's theories had the potential for disaster, and droughts ensured that it was. Ukraine is known as a 'bread basket' - a fertile land which can produce lots of food. For this reason, when a crop fails in a bread basket it is devastating. Consequently, millions starved, and human actions made it even worse. The richer peasants burnt crops and killed animals to stop the state seizing it, and the state also funnelled food to the cities; as a result rural areas had even less food. Especially Ukraine has argued that the Holodomor was a genocide; that Stalin purposefully denied rural areas of food in order to punish Ukrainian nationalism. We do not know if this was Stalin's aim, but it is clear how destructive it was for Ukrainians. 

Russificiation policies can also be seen as a form of cultural genocide; by enforcing Russian in schools and silencing non-Russian cultural forms it was an attempt to wipe out these cultures. This is a clear break in earlier Soviet policies it attempted to balance various nationalities, and it is no coincidence that de-Stalinisation of the 1950s saw a reversal of this policy. Part of this was to appeal to Russians in the non-Russian regions which gave increased rights to non-Russians at the expense of Russians. The 1930s and 1940s also saw various attacks on minorities deemed to be 'unreliable'. During the Purges antisemitism was used to attack Trotsky and Zinoviev - ironically capitalist states used antisemitism to attack the Soviet Union claiming it was ran by Jews. Although Stalin made antisemitism illegal, even punishable by death, it was still used as a dogwhistle to delegitimise opponents. Even the creation of the Jewish Autonomous Oblast was not an attempt to protect Jews - he imagined it as creating a loyal community near Manchuria to protect against an expansionist Japan. Many small national groups were expelled from their homes - 202,000 Crimean Tatars were given 15 minutes warning before their expulsion in 1944. It took until 1956 for them to be able to return home. 

Conclusion
The Statue of Lenin in Moscow
The October Revolution was one of the most important events in human history, seeing a clear attempt to break with the old order to create the first workers' state. Although it can be argued that the revolution was 'betrayed', regardless it inspired a series of mass movements both in the USSR and elsewhere to fight for a better world. While bogged down in bureaucracy, the USSR did offer access to housing, employment, education, and food which millions would be unable to otherwise. The collapse of the USSR in 1991, and the implementation of unrestricted capitalism was a demographic disaster for the average person. Like many things in history, the Russian Revolution and the early Soviet Union offers a contradictory and complex legacy.

The sources I have used are as follows:
-Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes,1914-1991, (London: 1994)
-C.L.R. James, World Revolution, 1917-1936: The Rise and Fall of the Communist International, First Prism Edition, (New York: 2011)
-Slavoj Zizek, Lenin 2017, (London: 2017)
-Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Lifes in Extraordinary Times, Soviet Russia in the 1930s, (Oxford: 1999)
-Anita Kingler, 'Sarah Badcock on Russia’s revolutions from a provincial perspective', Centre for the Study of Modern and Contemporary History, (29/01/2020), [Accessed 01/05/2020]
-China Mieville, October: The Story of the Russian Revolution, (London: 2017)
-Ronald Grigor Suny, (ed.), The Cambridge History of Russia: Vol. III The Twentieth Century, (Cambridge: 2006)
-John Reed, Ten Days That Shook the World, 100th Anniversary Edition, (New York: 2017)
-Neil Faulkner, A People's History of the Russian Revolution, (London: 2017)
-Orlando Figes, A People's Tragedy: A History of the Russian Revolution, (New York: 1996)
-Leon Trotsky, History of the Russian Revolution, Haymarket Books Edition, (Chicago: 2008)
-Sheila Fitzpatrick, The Russian Revolution, Second Edition, (Oxford: 1994)

Next time we will be looking at the horrors of Nazi rule, and one of the darkest parts of human history. For other World History posts we have a list here, and for blog updates please see our Facebook or catch me on Twitter @LewisTwiby.

Sunday, 1 March 2020

Left-Wing and the 'Other' History: The Internationale

The Internationale, or L'Internationale with its original French title, has remained one of the most important and widespread left-wing anthems since its creation close to 150 years ago. If you have not heard the song this video below will be helpful:

This is just one of the several versions of the song in English alone. Originating as a French song, L'Internationale has been translated into languages across the world ranging from Czech to Esperanto to Zulu to Bengali reflecting the international ideal of the socialist movement. Especially among Marxists and anarchists, although there are exceptions, there has been a desire to build an international movement; borders were, and still argued to be, another way to exploit the working-class. It can be argued that internationalism is coded into the DNA of modern socialism - Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and Mikhail Bakunin were all political exiles so had to rely on international support. L'Internationale emerged as part of this socialist internationalism.

The Origins of the Song
Eugene Pottier
The song was written by French socialist Eugene Pottier during the aftermath of the ill-fated Paris Commune of 1871. Following defeat in the Franco-Prussian War, and the declaration of the newly founded German Empire in the Palace of Versailles, French emperor Louis Napoleon, (the nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte), fled and a shaky Third Republic was formed. In Paris, and a few other cities, the working-classes seized control and formed communes with the intention of radically changing society. Despite being called the 'Paris Commune' it always had an international trend to it - many of its leaders were Polish and Russian exiles, and workers from Britain, Germany, and Algeria helped construct the commune. However, the Paris Commune was brutally crushed by the French army, and it caused a rift in the first attempt to create an international movement of socialist - the First International. To summarise this rift, bear in mind this is a very simplified explanation, the followers of Karl Marx argued that it failed as the Commune was to ready to remove the state, while the followers of Mikhail Bakunin argued that they had left too much of the state intact which caused its failure. This rift has never been healed, and is why we have two main branches of socialist thought: Marxism and anarchism. It was this background that Pottier wrote the song. Pottier was a member of both the Commune and the Internationale, and his song became its anthem until it was dissolved in 1876.

Debout, les damnés de la terre
Debout, les forçats de la faim
La raison tonne en son cratère
C'est l'éruption de la fin
Du passé faisons table rase
Foule esclave, debout, debout
Le monde va changer de base
Nous ne sommes rien, soyons tout
Chorus
C'est la lutte finale
Groupons-nous, et demain
L'Internationale
Sera le genre humain.
Il n'est pas de sauveurs suprêmes
Ni Dieu, ni César, ni tribun
Producteurs, sauvons-nous nous-mêmes
Décrétons le salut commun
Pour que le voleur rende gorge
Pour tirer l'esprit du cachot
Soufflons nous-mêmes notre forge
Battons le fer quand il est chaud.
Chorus
L'État comprime et la loi triche
L'impôt saigne le malheureux
Nul devoir ne s'impose au riche
Le droit du pauvre est un mot creux
C'est assez, languir en tutelle
L'égalité veut d'autres lois
Pas de droits sans devoirs dit-elle
Égaux, pas de devoirs sans droits.
Chorus
Hideux dans leur apothéose
Les rois de la mine et du rail
Ont-ils jamais fait autre chose
Que dévaliser le travail ?
Dans les coffres-forts de la bande
Ce qu'il a créé s'est fondu
En décrétant qu'on le lui rende
Le peuple ne veut que son dû.
Chorus
Les rois nous saoulaient de fumées
Paix entre nous, guerre aux tyrans
Appliquons la grève aux armées
Crosse en l'air, et rompons les rangs
S'ils s'obstinent, ces cannibales
À faire de nous des héros
Ils sauront bientôt que nos balles
Sont pour nos propres généraux.
Chorus
Ouvriers, paysans, nous sommes
Le grand parti des travailleurs
La terre n'appartient qu'aux hommes
L'oisif ira loger ailleurs
Combien de nos chairs se repaissent
Mais si les corbeaux, les vautours
Un de ces matins disparaissent
Le soleil brillera toujours.
Chorus
As Pottier became exiled in New York following the aftermath of the Paris Commune he translated it into English:
 
Arise, ye workers from your slumber,
Arise, ye prisoners of want.
For reason in revolt now thunders,
and at last ends the age of cant!
Away with all your superstitions,
Servile masses, arise, arise!
We'll change henceforth the old tradition,
And spurn the dust to win the prize!
Chorus
So comrades, come rally,
And the last fight let us face.
The Internationale
Unites the human race.
 No more deluded by reaction,
On tyrants only we'll make war!
The soldiers too will take strike action,
They'll break ranks and fight no more!
And if those cannibals keep trying,
To sacrifice us to their pride,
They soon shall hear the bullets flying,
We'll shoot the generals on our own side.
Chorus
No saviour from on high delivers,
No faith have we in prince or peer.
Our own right hand the chains must shiver,
Chains of hatred, greed and fear.
E'er the thieves will out with their booty,
And to all give a happier lot.
Each at his forge must do their duty,
And we'll strike the iron while it's hot.
Chorus
The tune we now sing L'Internationale to now was not the original tune. Instead, it was originally sang to the tune of the famous anthem of the French Revolution, La Marseillaise. Even after L'Internationale became popular, La Marseillaise was still sung - in his account of the Russian Revolution Leon Trotsky argued that Russian workers sang both. In 1888 Belgian socialist Pierre De Geyter changed the tune to the one we now know, although the lateness of his evolution of the song would explain why Russian workers sang both songs. Russia's isolation likely meant that De Geyter's update was not widely known by the time of the outbreak of revolution in 1905 and 1917. 
Pierre De Geyter

L'Internationale becomes International
After De Geyter updated the tune, and thanks to the arrival of an internationalist anarchist and Marxist labour movement, allowed the lyrics to become international. The United States got its own lyrics by Charles Hope Kerr, which became the established lyrics in the USA thanks to its inclusion into the Little Red Book released by the Industrial Workers of the World. In 1902 Arkady Kots made the first Russian translation, in 1910 Emil Luckhardt made the first German translation, 1923 Qu Qiubai made the first Mandarin translation, and during the last decades of British rule in India until the 1950s it was translated into Bengali, Malayalam, Assamese, and Urdu. Although new translations were also made for various reasons. To celebrate the fifty-fifth anniversary of the Paris Commune leftists in the Koumintang's army made a new Mandarin translation in 1926, and to honour the first decade of Maoist rule in China Shen Baoji made a third translation. Billy Bragg in 1989 controversially made a new English version, the one shown at the top of this post, as he thought the lyrics required updating - something other socialists like left-wing Labour politician Tony Benn disagreed with. Bragg's version still remains controversial as it does flow much better, but the lyrics are much less explicitly socialist compared to the original or Kerr's version. 
                                                                      One of Jiang Qing's operas

L'Internationale has had a long and varied history on the Left. Until 1944 it was the national anthem of the Soviet Union when it was replaced by the Hymn of the Soviet Union, possibly as Stalin hoped to use the hymn to further bolster his image. While states have tried to co-opt L'Internationale the masses used it themselves. During the Cultural Revolution in China the state played the song on the radio, but tried to silence it when the Red Guards and communes began using the song themselves. One of the key figures in the radical Shanghai Commune, Jiang Qing, regularly used the song in her operas which would be banned by the counter-revolutionary government under Deng Xiaoping which emerged in the post-Mao era. Similarly, the anti-state, but still left-wing, protesters during the 1953 Berlin Uprising, 1968 Prague Spring, and 1989 protests in China and East Germany all used the song. By using it they wished to show their own radicalism, and also protest the state claiming to be radical. Even now, the song remains a key protest song, and represents the long history of leftist internationalism, something deeply needed in a growing climate of intolerance.

Thank you for reading, and for other Left-Wing and the 'Other' history posts please see our list here. For other blog updates please see our Facebook or catch me on Twitter @LewisTwiby.

Sunday, 9 June 2019

World History: Capitalism and Socialism


Today we're looking at two ideas which have shaped the world today: capitalism and socialism. We looked briefly at these ideas when we looked at the Industrial Revolution, but we will expand on them today. Some form of capitalism and socialism have existed for centuries across the world: Joyce Appleby joked that historians of capitalism have stated that it started repeatedly since the Roman Empire; Peter Marshall has stressed how ancient Daoism and Buddhism can anachronistically be described as leading themselves into being anarchist; and the Zapatistas in contemporary Chiapas, Mexico have stated that their socialist policies are in continuation with indigenous practices. This is important to bear in mind as today we'll largely be looking at the development of modern capitalism and socialism - this leads us to a focus on Europe and North America. However, when I can, I want to expand this to look at developments in capitalism and socialism outside the Euro-American world. Before we begin, I also want to preface this post by stating that I am a socialist, so I will likely be more critical of capitalism than some other histories which you might read - such as Appleby's history of capitalism referenced in this post.

From Mercantilism to Modern Capitalism
A French seaport in 1638 during the height of French mercantilism
A basic definition of capitalism is an economic and political system where trade and the way goods are produced, the means of production, are in the hands of private owners. This is a broad definition and describes many societies throughout history, and one of the main forms which this took was mercantilism and merchant capitalism. Merchant capitalism, in particular, we have seen throughout the World History series, and could be found in most regions of the world - especially India, China, and Japan. Mercantilism, meanwhile, is a form of capitalism which aims to see the maximisation of a state's exports - trade and consumption was seen as finite, so it was believed that to survive you needed a monopoly on trade. This led to the formation of large companies, as it was a safer investment for wealthier individuals to own shares in a company than entirely rely on your own capital as in the past. A major mercantilist in England, Thomas Mun, was influential in the formation of the English East India Company (EIC), and similar ventures opened with the Dutch East India Company (VOC) and the Hudson Bay Company in Canada to name two prominent ones. Mercantilism required state intervention in order to protect trade, so in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries protectionist policies were implemented to edge out competitors, and there were even wars - especially between the English and Dutch. However, by the late-eighteenth century mercantilism started becoming routinely criticised. The best known critic is that of Adam Smith. Smith was a Scottish economist and philosopher, and was highly influenced by the Scottish Enlightenment which led him in 1776 to write An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Smith did not live in a vacuum: it is no coincidence that his ideas of liberty were being repeated by other economists as American revolutionaries and Thomas Paine were calling for political liberty. In Wealth of Nations Smith broke from traditional narratives that humans were unpredictable and capricious, instead he argued that 'principle which prompts to save is the desire of bettering our condition, a desire which though generally calm and dispassionate, comes with us from the womb, and never leaves us till we go into the grave'. Smith argued that the 'invisible hand' of the free market should govern economics; states should take a backseat and allow the supply/demand generated by markets, caused by human purchasing power, to govern economies. It was human nature to naturally lead to productivity and the best market solutions.
Adam Smith
Smith based his writings on economic developments in Britain since the 1600s, and this leads us back to a discussion we had when we looked at the Industrial Revolution, why did modern capitalism emerge in Europe? Max Weber argued that it was due to the 'Protestant work ethic' - this falls apart when we look at the rapid industrialisation of Japan in the 1870s. Modern, industrial capitalism primarily emerged in Britain and the Netherlands for several reasons. The first is weakened monarchical power - the long history of republicanism in the Netherlands and the Wars of the Three Kingdoms in Britain resulting in the execution of Charles I gave their respective parliaments more power. This prevented possible restrictive laws on markets from being passed, and gave non-royals the ability to forge legislation - it is no coincidence that the UK and US quickly adopted aspects of Wealth of Nations. Changes in the countryside played a great influence - crop rotation and new crops from the Americas, like potatoes, allowed more crop production and population growth. Due to increasing crop yields this drove down the price of food which allowed people to have greater ability to purchase goods. In England, the Enclosure Acts, which Karl Marx placed great emphasis on for the formation of modern capitalism, placed common land in the hands of private owners which, in turn, forced tenant farmers off of land and into urban areas. Britain's easy access to coal, and the high numbers of waterways in the Netherlands and Britain allowing for easier transport, allowed for industrialisation to take place. The first chapter of Marx's Kapital explains well how this promoted the origins of industrial capitalism. He uses the example of a coat being made of 20 yards of linen, but is worth double due to the value of labour. As the factory owner owns the means of producing the coat they keep the profit after the value of the goods and labour has been taken out. To maximise profit you have to reduce the value of labour without overproducing - he uses diamonds in this case, they are valuable as they are hard to get, but if they were common their price would decrease. Mechanisation made the production of commodities faster and easier reducing the hours needed to produce our coat, so factories emerged to house the machinery and increasing urban populations created a workforce to work in the factories. Finally, modern capitalism could not exist without the exploitation of colonised peoples - as argued by David Landes, industry needed slavery. Britain and the Netherlands were deeply involved in the Atlantic Slave Trade and imperialism through the EIC and VOC. Raw materials could be produced abundantly and cheaply in India, Indonesia, and the Caribbean, and the colonised regions opened up markets for the selling of finished products.

The Capital Revolution

In 1848 Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote that the new capitalist, bourgeoisie class 'has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations...It has been the first to show what man's activity can bring about. It has accomplished wonders far surpassing Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, and Gothic cathedrals; it has conducted expeditions that put in the shade all former Exoduses of nations and crusades'. Wherever capitalism touched it greatly changed. The most notable example is the impact on the environment. Lands completely changed as they were uprooted for mining and construction - the construction of the Suez Canal managed to link two of the major seas. The burning of fossil fuels warmed global temperatures putting us, unfortunately, on the current path to climate catastrophe - smoggy cityscapes became common in late-nineteenth century art. Before 1811 the peppered moth in England was white, but soot from chimneys in northern England made the trees appear darker so they rapidly evolved to be black. Thanks to deindustrialisation since the 1970s these same moths are returning to their whiter colouration as trees are less sooty. Capitalism created new industries and made older ones more profitable creating demographic shifts. In Britain, cities like Glasgow, Birmingham, and Manchester dwarfed older seats of power, so much so, that several acts had to be passed in parliament redistributing where parliamentary seats were. Gold rushes in South Africa, California, and Australia saw booms in population as people rushed to make a fortune from gold, or from miners. In Australia 'bushrangers' preyed upon prospective gold miners, and some have become subject to folk legend, like Nat Kelly. These regions saw other demographic changes. California saw an influx of immigrants from China and Mexico, and Australia from Germany and China which today influences the demographics of the regions. Africans started moving to the cities, and in the South African gold mines different ethnic groups started interacting, and new ideas of sexuality even emerged. New groups, the bourgeoisie, started supplanting traditional elites. Although new capitalists in Japan were often from poorer samurai families, and intermarriage between poor samurais and wealthy merchants had happened before 1868, Japanese conservatives in the 1870s and 1880s feared capitalism believing it was disrupting the Confucian order of the country. There was a push and pull between old elites and the new: Prussian Junkers in Germany remained influential until World War Two but ceded ground to new industrialists; and while British aristocrats balked at the idea of allowing steel magnate Andrew Carnegie into their 'circle' they had to begrudgingly marry their children to American industrialists and allowing a Jewish banker, Lionel de Rothschild, into the House of Lords in 1858. However, this did not stop the Rothschilds from being subjected to intense antisemitic attacks - a topic for when we look at racism in a future post.
Japanese women in a basket weaving factory
The bourgeoisie were not the only class to emerge thanks to capitalism - there was also the working class. We see different cultures and identities emerge consequently. Prior to industrialisation, women could find some form of emancipation thanks to textile works - they could make their own textiles in their home. The factory saw the means of production taken out of their hands which limited their agency. We will explore the idea of 'separate spheres' more when we look at the origins of feminism in a future post, but it is important to reference it here. This was an idea, primarily in Europe and the US but it was also adopted in Japan, that there were two spheres: the public, of work and politics dominated by men, and the private, of the home and family dominated by women. This was less the case for working class women - working class women, and children, regularly worked in factories or other industries. In 1882, women comprised three-quarters of textile workers in Japan, and these figures were replicated across industrial societies. Factory life was hard regardless of age and gender - to save costs owners allowed poor and dangerous conditions to flourish. Injury and death was common, and reformers largely focused on child and female labour when criticising poor working conditions. In 1911 the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in New York burnt down killing 146 garment workers, of which 123 were women, which caused outrage and the laws passed in order to improve work conditions. Women were not passive in this. E. Patricia Tsurumi has discussed how women resisted sexual abuse and poor work conditions through go-slows, strikes, running away (over 60% of Kanebo mill workers between 1905 and 1915 did so), and singing insulting songs: The owner and I are like spinning machine thread/ Easily tied, but easily broken. 

New Cultural Worlds
Carnegie Hall in 1910
An emergence of a new class with purchasing power created a new and exciting world. As argued by Eric Hobsbawm, the home 'was the quintessential bourgeois world, for in it...could the problems and contradictions of his society be forgotten or artificially eliminated'. The domestic sphere emerged to ensure that the home remained central in society - this is especially prevalent in Japan when Meiji reformers after 1868 cast the nation as one family. In Britain, Christmas was redeveloped to be about family just as much as Christ; Christmas trees, songs, and dinners were meant to symbolise the warmth of the family. The public, both bourgeois and working, looked to Queen Victoria - firmly out of political life the royals served as something to emulate, so the German Prince Albert introducing the German tradition of Christmas trees to his family was adopted by everyone. Wealthier women could work before marriage in clerical employment, but they were expected to give this up when they got married. It is notable that these women also became reformers. City life was seen as breeding sin, vice, and poverty, so they formed organisations to tackle this. The Women's Christian Temperance Movement in the US is a good example. The first suffragettes, like Emmeline Pankhurst in the UK, were also moneyed women, and they aimed to use their position to gain the vote. Clothing has always been used to signify class, and capitalism continued this trend. However, new consumption allowed those who could afford it to dress like the wealthy. This was even the case at the fringes of capitalism. Jean and John Comaroff have discussed how, before colonial rule, Tswana royals in southern Africa controlled access to European clothing and wore it to meet with Europeans. Entertainment could now be purchased. Poor and wealthy went to shows, sometimes together to the scandal of society, and holidays emerged. The Rokumeikan in Japan became a scene where elite could sip drinks and do the waltz combining European and Japanese formal wear. New and old elites started making contacts for the first time - aristocrats had to allow nouveau riche into their circles, and they became the patrons of culture. Andrew Carnegie sponsored the construction of venues, like Carnegie Hall, and even expeditions to discover dinosaurs. 1916 saw oil tycoon John Rockefeller become the first billionaire, and financier J.P. Morgan, supposedly, joked that, when asked how much it costs to own a yacht, replied 'if you have to ask, you can't afford it'.

Empire and Capitalism
Khama III, Chief of the Bamangwato and Sir Albert Spicer, London Missionary Society Treasurer
Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin famously stated that imperialism was the final stage of capitalism, Hannah Arendt argued they marched hand in hand. Regardless, empire and capitalism were intrinsically linked. Colonial rule saw the economies of colonised societies to geared towards the export of raw materials and the import of finished goods - as late as the 1950s Britain tried to make nut production the crop of Tanganyika in east Africa. Although it is an exaggeration to say that Britain broke the thumbs of Bengali textile weavers, Britain did break Bengal's textile production to prevent competition. As we saw when we looked at British rule in India, key parts of the Indian continent was converted to the production of raw materials, primarily cotton, in what Romesh Chandra Dutt in 1902 described as the 'drain theory'. Britain had prevented the development of an Indian economy 'draining' it of resources. This had devastating direct consequences. When crops failed, as they were prevented from growing crops on land for cotton or saffron, it created devastating famines - a tenth of Orissa's population died in the 1865-6 famine, 3.5 million died in Madras and a million in Mysore in the devastating 1876-8 famine. While capitalism prevented famines during crop failure in Europe, it made it far worse in India. Capitalism was often used as a way for colonial expansion - Britain used opium to edge its way into China, and Britain and France used loans to Egypt in order to enforce their hegemony, and the US used companies to oust governments in Central America. Meanwhile, Leopold II of Belgium formed a company to rule the Congo for him. Today's Democratic Republic of the Congo has its shape due to traders setting up stations along rivers to best monopolise rubber and ivory. The Congo Free State, similarly, saw some of the worst atrocities in colonialism where Congolese were brutally enslaved, beaten, and killed in order to extract resources. A leather whip, the viboko, became the symbol of Belgian rule as Congolese were forced to work over 80 hours a week in poor conditions. Elsewhere, there were hopes to bring the colonised into a capitalist market. The work of the Comaroffs is especially interesting in this regards. The London Missionary Society (LMS) in southern Africa particularly tried to introduce consumerism, linking consumerism to Christian faith. Tswana were encouraged to buy European clothing as a sign of faith, and Tswana, in turn, adapted it for themselves - children and unmarried women wore pre-Christian clothing and wore European later. I want to discuss this more in our next World History post as we've just scratched the surface of colonialism and imperialism here.

The Origins of Modern Socialism
Marx and Engels
Conditions created by capitalism, although it brought benefits, it also brought intense suffering. Poverty, disease, and alcoholism were just some of the problems which capitalism either caused or accentuated. There were reformers who hoped to relieve the poor, such as York confectioner Seebohm Rowntree, but others rejected socialism entirely. Instead of private individuals owning means of production workers should own it - this was socialism. As we've already mentioned, some form of socialism have existed in some form across the world and history - Peruvian Marxists have argued that the Inca were 'feudal communists' as they did not use markets. Regardless, the first of the modern socialists emerged with the 'Utopian socialists' like Charles Fourier, Robert Owen, and Henri de Saint-Simon, although George Lichtheim describes them as 'doctrinaires' instead. These socialists argued that self-governing communities should be formed based on egalitarian ideas - Fourier is believed to have coined the term 'feminism' and advocated for homosexual emancipation. However, utopian socialists were later criticised by a new generation of socialists for being utopian. The most notable of these were the 'scientific socialists' of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Engels in particular in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific (1880) argued that utopians created new ideas with no practical way in achieving them, whereas 'scientific socialists' looked at real world conditions and developed theory from there. Marx was born into a German Jewish family (which converted to Christianity to avoid antisemitic laws), and had a long history of radical politics. He was influenced by philosopher Georg Wilhelm Hegel and adapted his ideas of dialectical materialism. Human history was a conflict of classes driven by ideas, a thesis combats and antithesis before reaching a synthesis which, in turn, forms its own antithesis. Engels was the son of a German factory owner, and became upon seeing the horrific conditions of his father's Manchester factory became radicalised. Mary Burns, an Irish worker in his father's factory, greatly influenced his views, and in 1845 wrote The Condition of the Working Class in England. Marx and Engels became close friends and regularly worked together joining the Communist League. Inspired by the 1848 revolts Marx and Engels wrote their most influential piece - The Communist Manifesto - setting out their ideas in a way for workers to easily access.

In France, a different theorist emerged called Pierre-Joseph Proudhon who rejected the idea of the state entirely - Marx and Engels had advocated the proletariat, the producing class, seizing the state in order to bring about socialism. In 1840 his text What is Property? declared that 'Property is Theft', and that rejecting property and state could the proletariat be liberated. He declared, as well, that he was an 'anarchist', but, unlike later anarchists, he believed that markets could exist under socialism. Also, he was very antisemitic and sexist, so much so that he was denounced by many other anarchists, although he did state that 'In my ideal society I would be guillotined as a conservative'. Meanwhile, a Russian theorist, who became involved in the 1848 Czech Rebellion, made his way to France - Mikhail Bukanin. Bukanin was influenced by Proudhon but rejected the idea of having a market in any form. Louis Blanqui, meanwhile, controversially argued that a small cabal should take control of the state to aid the working peoples. Despite their clashes, Marx and Bukanin helped form the International Workingmen's Association, better known as the First International, in 1864 uniting all socialists and trade unions in order to plan out revolution. However, it was deeply divided and women were barred until 1865. In 1867 Harriet Law became the first female member, but she remained its only female member.

The Paris Commune

1871 proved to be the most important year in leftist history. Louis Napoleon declared war on Prussia but was roundly defeated and abdicated leaving France in disarray. The peoples of Paris rose up, and a crowd of women marched upon the local barracks seizing cannons and weapons. Leftist journalist Louis Delescluze and Polish officer Jaroslaw Dabrowski were elected to lead the newly formed Paris Commune. Proudhonists, Blanquists, libertarian socialists, and scientific socialists made up the ideology of the Paris Commune, and this is shown by their policies. Guillotines were symbolically burnt to show a break with the violent French Revolution, the Church and state were declared to be separate, the Louvre was turned into a arms factory, the Vendome Column depicting Napoleon was torn down, and workers given control over companies. Women were integral to the Commune where Louise Michel became one of the most influential figures in the revolt, and the Union des femmes pour la défense de Paris et les soins aux blessés was formed by socialist bookbinder Nathalie Lemel and Russian exile Elisabeth Demitrieff. The Women's Union demanded women's education, divorce, suffrage, and an end to capitalism. The Commune was very international - French, German, Russian, Spanish, and even Algerian individuals joined together in protecting the Commune. However, when the French Third Republic got together intense street fighting began and the Commune was brutally crushed. Afterwards, the First International became heavily divided over why the Paris Commune failed. Marx in The Civil War in France (1871) argued that the communards were too quick to dismantle the state, if they had taken it over they could have better defended themselves. Meanwhile, anarchists like Bukanin argued that it failed as they left too much of the state intact - no one took over the Bank of France which then funded the French army. Marx kicked the anarchists out of the First International, and since then the left has been divided between Marxists and anarchists. Prussian chancellor Otto von Bismarck commented that 'Crowned heads, wealth and privilege may well tremble should ever again the Black and Red unite!'

Developments with Socialism after 1871
A collection of Japanese anarchists including Osugi Sekae and Ito Noe
Anarchism and what would become Marxism would continue to develop after 1871. Marx and Engels continued expanding their ideas - Engels released his Socialism: Utopian and Scientific and Marx would eventually release his very influential Das Kapital. Marx's ideas were always changing and he rejected the term 'Marxism' as it implied that he had the answers - he believed people should start with his ideas. Marx and Engels were also keen to dispel cult of personalities which occasionally cropped up. However, the rift with the anarchists was never healed and anarchists were barred from the Second International when it was formed in 1889. Anarchism similarly developed - a Russian aristocrat Peter Kropotkin - would become the most influential anarchist thinker helping influence anarcho-communism, and Italian anarchist Errico Malatesta helped influence anarcho-syndicalism. Marxism and anarchism went beyond their roots with European male thinkers as new thinkers and activists applied their ideas to new situations. For example, Russian Marxist Alexandra Kollontai blended Marxism and feminism, and is seen as the founder of Scandinavian feminism for her activism in the region during World War One. Similarly, Rosa Luxemburg and Clara Zetkin in Germany would try and combat sexism in the labour movement, and try to apply class emancipation to the suffrage movement. Across the world activists blended local ideas with new ideas - Peter Marshall has argued that Mohandas Gandhi was even inspired by anarchism. Swami Vivekananda reinterpreted the Bhagavad Gita to craft it as a libertarian text which future anarchists, like Aurobindo Ghose, would build upon. Japanese censors prevented the translation of Marxist texts, but Kotuku Shusui managed to escape censors by translating anarchist texts - it took until the 1920s for Lenin to be translated into Japanese! Kotuku asserted that anarchism fit with Daoism and Zen Buddhism helping form the paper Heimin. Feminist Ito Noe was an influential writer for the paper Bluestockings calling for female and class emancipation. In the 1920s the anarchist movement was brutally crushed, Ito was strangled in prison, so Marxism replaced anarchism, but, even today, the Japanese Communist Party has strong anarchist leanings. In 1905 the influential 'One Big Union' the International Workers of the World (IWW) was formed in Chicago. Founded by figures like Irish socialist James Connolly, Jewish thinker Emma Goldman, and 'Big Bill' Haywood, among others, it was inspired by anarchist thought to unite the labour movement. Russia was a site of both Marxist and anarchist movements, but the most significant figure to come from this was Vladimir Lenin. A history of secret societies due to state repression influenced what would become Marxist-Leninism. Lenin argued that the workers had to be guided by a revolutionary vanguardist party, as Lenin would succeed in establishing the Soviet Union Marxist-Leninism would become the dominant Marxist thought among twentieth-century communist parties.

Conclusion
The nineteenth and twentieth centuries have been greatly shaped by the clash between capitalism and socialism. Capitalism broke the old feudal world and forged a new revolutionary system, but, in doing so, created suffering for the masses. Socialism emerged as a force to resist and liberate the masses. Joyce Appleby argued that capitalism was a cultural system just as much as an economic one - as we have seen this is accurate. Capitalism formed new identities and cultural practices, as argued also by Marx and Engels the means of production forms a superstructure which all things in society comes from. Equally, socialism developed its own culture - as seen in the Paris Commune egalitarian and emancipatory ideas influenced a desire to emancipate workers and women. The anarchist-Marxist divide continues to divide the left - they even fought one another during the Russian and Spanish Civil Wars. These ideas continue to shape our lives today, and many of the debates we have now have been argued for the last century and a half. When we see a pop-up ad on the internet its origin lies back with Adam Smith in 1776, and the means to critique it with Marx.

The sources I have used are as follows:
-Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Capital, 1848-1875, (London: Abacus, 1975)
-Joyce Appleby, The Relentless Revolution: A History of Capitalism, (New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, 2010)
-Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, (New York, NY: MetaLibri, 1776/2007)
-Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, The Communist Manifesto, (London: Penguin, 1848/2015)
-Karl Marx, Das Kapital, Volume 1, (London: Redwood Press, 1887/1971)
-Friedrich Engels, Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, (London: Progress Publishers, 1880/1970)
-John and Jean Comaroff, Of Revelation and Revolution, Volume 2: The Dialectics of Modernity on a South African Frontier, (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1997)
-George Lichtheim, A Short History of Socialism, (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1970)
-Colin Campbell, The Romantic Ethic and the Spirit of Modern Consumerism, (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987)
-T.C.W. Blanning, 'The Commercialization and Sacralization of European Culture in the Nineteenth Century', in T.C.W. Blanning, (ed.), The Oxford Illustrated History of Modern Europe, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 120-147
-E. Patricia Tsurumi, 'Female Textile Workers and the Failure of Early Trade Unionism in Japan', History Workshop, 18, (1984), 3-27
-Peter Marshall, Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism, (London: Fontana Press, 1993)
-Kristin Ross, Communal Luxury: The Political Imaginary of the Paris Commune, (London: Verso, 2015)

Thank you for reading. Next time we will look at imperialism and colonialism, and how that affected colonised peoples. For other World History posts we have a list here. For future blog updates please see our Facebook or catch me on Twitter @LewisTwiby.